MASTER 
NEGA  TIVE 

NO.  91-80249 


MICROFILMED  1991 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the 
Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 

The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  ~  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or  other 
reproductions  of  copyrighted  material... 

Columbia  University  Library  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to 
accept  a  copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


AUTHOR: 


ELLIS,  ROBINSON 


TITLE: 


PROFESSOR  BIRT'S 

EDITION... 

PLACE: 

LONDON 

DA  TE : 

1910 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 


Master  Negative  // 


BinUOGRAPHIC  MICROFORM  TARHFT 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


BKS/PROD  Books 


FUL/BIB   NYCG91-B75714 


FIN  10  IAUG87-B4995  -  Record  1  of  1  -  Record  added  today 


Acquisitions 


NYCG-PT 


ID:NYCG91-B757i4 
CC:9124  BLTiam 


CP:nyu 

PC:r 

MMD: 

010 

040 

100  10 

245  10 


RTYPra  ST:p  FRN 

OCF:  CSC:c  MOD 

L:eng     INT:  GPC:  BIO 

PD:1991/1910  REP:  CPI 
POL: 


DM: 


RR: 


MS 
SNR 
FIC 
FSI 
COL 


0 
0 


EL 
ATC 
CON 
ILC 

EML 


AD:08-21-91 
UD:08-21-9i 


MEI:1 
GEN: 


11:0 

BSE: 


260  0 
300 

600  00 
LOG 
QD 


OR: 

all395 

NNC^icNNC 

Ellis,  Robinson, ^dl834-1913. 

Professor  Birt's  edition  of  the  Vergilian  Catalepton{:h[microf ormJ;}:ca 
lecture  by  R.  Ellis,  Corpus  professor  of  Latin;  delivered  at  Corpus  Chri 
sti  college  on  Friday,  June  3,  1910. 

London, }:aOxford,}:bH.  Frowde,}:cl910. 

17  p.}:c22  cm. 

Virgil.{:tApprendix  Vergil iana.|:pCatalepton. 

RLIN 

08-21-91 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 


FILM     SlZE:__3p_^j^ 

IMAGE  PLACEMENT:    lA    ®>    ID     IIB 
DATE     FILMED: 


REDUCTION     RATIO:       lUa^-A 


initials__3_>Sl_ 

filmed  by:  research^ pudlications.  inc  woqddridge  ct 


[TPUl 


Association  for  Information  and  Image  INanagement 


1100  Wayne  Avenue,  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

^234         56789       10       n 


ui 


12       13       14       15    mm 

iiiilii 


llll[Mll|ll|l|iijilii|ilii|ilm 

1  2  -^  !  c  ' 


Inches 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


28 


U5 

150 

156     mil  3  2 


Ui 

itt 

u 

Miku 


U6 

ko 


2.5 
2.2 


1.4 


2.0 


1.8 


1.6 


MfiNUFPCTURED   TO  flllM   STPNDfiRDS 
BY  PPPLIED  IMflGEp    INC. 


PROFESSOR   DIRT'S  EDITION 


OF  THK 


VERGILIAN  CATALEPTON 


A  LECTURE  BY 


R.  ELLIS 


CORIMTS    PROFESSOR    OF    I.ATIX 


DELIVERED  AT  CORPUS  CHRISTI  COLLEGE 
ON  FRIDAY,  JUNE  3,  1910 


LONDON 
HENRY  FROWDE 

OXFORD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS,  AMEN  CORNER,  E.C. 
OXFORD  :   110  HIGH  STREET 

1910 


Price  One  Milling  net 


PROFESSOR   BIRT'S  EDITION 


OF  THE 


VERGILIAN  CATALEPTON 


A  LECTURE  BY 
R.  ELLIS 

CORPUS   PROFESSOR   OF   LATIH 


DELIVERED  AT  CORPUS  CHRISTI  COLLEGE 
ON  FRIDAY,  JUNE  3,  1910 


LONDON 
HENRY  FROWDE 

OXFORD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS,  AMEN  CORNER,  E.C. 
OXFORD  :  116  HIGH  STREET 

1910 


PROFESSOR  BIRT'S   EDITION  OF 
THE  VERGILIAN  CATALEPTON 


The  last  few  years  have  been  fruitful  in  new  editions 
and  explanations  of  the  minor  works  attributed  to  Vergil, 
now  more  commonly  known  as  the  Appendix  Vergiliana. 
Besides  the  Oxford  lecture  of  Professor  Mackail  elicited  by 
my  edition  of  1907,  and  the  interesting  translations  of  some 
poems  of  the  series  known  as  Catcdepton  by  the  accomplished 
President  of  Magdalen,  we  have  from  Italy  Sabbadini's 
monograph  entitled  Gatcdepton  Prlapea  et  Epigrammata, 
1 903,  and  from  Germany  two  notable  editions  in  the  present 
year  (1910),  Professor  Vollmer's  complete  text  of  the  whole 
collection,  Gulex  Dirae  Lydia  Copa  Moretum  Girls  Prlapea 
Gatalepton  Elegiae  in  Maecenatem  Aetna,  and  Professor 
Birt*s  separate  issue  lugendverse  und  Heimatpoesie  Vergils 
Erkldrung  des  Gatalepton.  Both  these  important  works  are 
from  the  indefatigable  press  of  B.  G.  Teubner.  A  few  years 
before,  Skutsch  of  Breslau  had  combated  the  prevailing  view 
as  to  the  authorship  of  the  Girls  in  two  successive  volumes, 
Aus  Vergil's  Fruhzeit  (1901),  Gallus  und  Vergil  (1906) ; 
while  the  Hungarian  scholar,  Geiza  N^methy,  has  not  only 
published  a  complete  text  and  commentary  on  the  Giris,  but 
propounded  new  and  daring  views  on  two  poems  of  the 
Gatalepton  (ix  and  xiii),  the  former  of  which  he  considers 
to  be  an  early  work  of  Ovid,  the  latter  an  epode  of  Horace 
accidentally  omitted  in  the  transmission. 

It  is  with  the  Gatalepton  only,  indeed  with  a  single  poem 
of  that  series,  that  we  have  to  do  now.  I  have  selected 
this  short  elegiac  composition  of  sixty-four  verses  not  for 


PROFESSOR  BIRT'S   EDITION   OF 
THE  VERGILIAN   CATALEPTON 


The  last  few  years  have  been  fruitful  in  new  editions 
and  explanations  of  the  minor  works  attributed  to  Vergil, 
now  more  commonly  known  as  the  Appendix  Vergiliana. 
Besides  the  Oxford  lecture  of  Professor  Mackail  elicited  by 
my  edition  of  1907,  and  the  interesting  translations  of  some 
poems  of  the  series  known  as  Gatalepton  by  the  accomplished 
President  of  Magdalen,  we  have  from  Italy  Sabbadini's 
monograph  entitled  Gatalepton  Prlapea  et  Epigrammata, 
1903,  and  from  Germany  two  notable  editions  in  the  present 
year  (1910),  Professor  Vollmer's  complete  text  of  the  whole 
collection,  Gulex  Dirae  Lydia  Gopa  Moretum  Girls  Prlapea 
Gatalepton  Elegiae  in  Maecenatem  Aetna,  and  Professor 
Birt's  separate  issue  lugendverse  und  Heimatpoesie  Vergils 
ErJddrung  des  Gatalepton.  Both  these  important  works  are 
from  the  indefatigable  press  of  B.  G.  Teubner.  A  few  years 
before,  Skutsch  of  Breslau  had  combated  the  prevailing  view 
as  to  the  authorship  of  the  Girls  in  two  successive  volumes, 
Aus  Vergil's  Frilhzeit  (1901),  Qallus  und  Vergil  (1906) ; 
while  the  Hungarian  scholar,  Geiza  N^methy,  has  not  only 
published  a  complete  text  and  commentary  on  the  Giris,  but 
propounded  new  and  daring  views  on  two  poems  of  the 
Gatalepton  (ix  and  xiii),  the  former  of  which  he  considers 
to  be  an  early  work  of  Ovid,  the  latter  an  epode  of  Horace 
accidentally  omitted  in  the  transmission. 

It  is  with  the  Gatalepton  only,  indeed  with  a  single  poem 
of  that  series,  that  we  have  to  do  now.  I  have  selected 
this  short  elegiac  composition  of  sixty-four  verses  not  for 


4  BIRT'S   EDITION  OF 

any  special  interest  in  its  subject,  the  Praise  of  Messalla, 
still  less  from  anything  particularly  attractive  in  its  diction 
or  metre,  nor  yet  from  any  wish  to  disprove  the  improbable 
theory  of  Nemethy,  that  it  is  an  early  work  of  Ovid's,  but 
as  the  longest  and  most  complete  piece  of  verse  in  the 
series  of  xv  or  xvi  to  which  it  belongs,  and  because  this 
series  has  within  the  present  year,  as  I  mentioned  above, 
received  a  new  and  very  careful  treatment  in  the  editorial 
hands  of  Professor  Birt  of  the  University  of  Marburg.  It 
is  my  hope  that  any  scholar  who  hears  or  sees  this  lecture 
will  find  time  and  opportunity  to  read  Birt's  volume  as 
a  whole.  It  appears  to  me  the  clearest  illustration  I  have 
yet  met  with  of  the  present  standpoint  of  German  criti- 
cism as  regards  the  constitution  of  classical,  especially 
Latin,  texts. 

In  the  Catalepton^  under  which  name  are  included  three 
poems  on  Priapus  and  several  short  epigrams,  one  MS.  of 
cent,  xii  stands  out  prominently  as  by  far  the  best  yet 
known.  This  MS.  is  the  Bruxellensis  10675,  6.  It  is  at 
Brussels  and  is  usually  cited  as  B.  Arundel  1 33  ( Ar.)  in  the 
British  Museum  of  fifteenth  century  comes  next,  but  at  a  long 
distance.  One  four-line  epigram  alone,  which  Ar.  and  the 
inferior  class  of  MSS.  all  contain,  is  not  to  be  found  in  the 
Bruxellensis.  It  follows  xiii.  16,  TalasiOy  talasio^  but  I  am 
not  aware  of  any  satisfactory  explanation  of  this.  Anyhow, 
we  have  reason  to  regret  its  absence  from  B,  for  the  first 
verse  of  it  is  so  desperately  corrupted  as  to  make  any  line 
of  interpretation  problematical. 

Birt,  a  friend  and  admirer  of  the  much  lamented  Bucheler, 
has  followed  in  editing  the  Catalepton  the  same  strict  rules 
as  his  master.  That  is  to  say,  he  gives  an  absolute  pre- 
ponderance to  the  readings  of  B,  and  very  generally  neglects 
the  inferior  fifteenth-century  MSS.  altogether.  It  is  not 
often,  I  believe,  that  a  single  codex  has  so  indisputable 
a  superiority,  or  that  one  can  assert  as  incontestably  the 
unique  weight  which  should  be  given  to  its  readings. 

The  elegiac  poem  which  I  am  examining,  ix  in  the  series 
of  Catalepton,  though  invoking  at  its  outset  the  inspiration 


THE  VERGILIAN  CATALEPTON  5 

of  the  Muses,  is  a  slight,  not  to  say  poor,  work,  even  if  hardly 
deserving  the  opprobrious  epithet  which  Professor  Birt  has 
given  it,  alberne  {'  silly '  or  *  foolish  ').  It  is  natural  to  com- 
pare it  with  the  longer  Panegyric  of  Messalla  usually 
printed  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  book  of  Tibullus, 
the  211  hexameters  beginning  Te  Messalla  canam ;  quan- 
quam  me  et  cognita  uirtus.  This  is  also  a  slight,  yet  hardly 
a  poor,  performance;  it  flows  on  not  unpleasingly  from 
one  topic  of  laudation  to  another,  and  is  on  the  whole  well 
sustained. 

At  least  nothing  is  to  be  found  in  it  as  weak  as  Quid  de 
te  possim  scribere^  quidue  tibi,  or  as  adulatory  as  : 

Ipsa  haec,  ipsa  ferent  rerum  monumenta  per  orbem, 
Ipsa  sibi  egregium  facta  decus  parient : 
nothing  as  obscure  in  composition  or  doubtful  in  structure  as 
SI  laudem  aspirare  humilia  si  adire  Cyrenas  can  be  quoted 
from  this  longer  Panegyric,  which  has  also  the  merit  of  more 
learned  references,  and  allusions  to  Greek  legend  or  fable  of 
a  more  interesting  and  recondite  type. 

What  member  of  the  house  of  Messalla  is  described  in  our 
Elegiac  encomium  Professor  Birt  leaves  undecided,  but  ends 
with  acquiescing  in  the  prevailing  view  that  it  was  the  great 
orator  and  general  M.  Valerius  Messalla  Corvinus,  the  patron 
and  friend  of  Tibullus.  It  is  true  we  might  expect  to  find 
more  distinct  reference  in  the  poem  to  the  oratorical  gifts 
of  Corvinus;  but  this  may  readily  be  explained  by  the 
poet's  desire  to  dwell  at  length  (1)  on  the  warlike  achieve- 
ments of  his  hero,  (2)  on  his  skill  as  a  composer  of  Greek 
verses. 

I  have  already  mentioned  the  theory  of  the  Hungarian 
Geiza  Nemethy,  ascribing  ix  to  no  less  a  writer  than 
Ovid,  and  identifying  the  Messalla  described  in  it  with 
Messalinus  the  elder  son  of  Corvinus. 

This  theory,  which  is  more  ingenious  than  plausible,  seems 
to  me  impossible.  Could  any  Messalla  of  that  period  of 
Roman  history,  any  of  the  Messallas  except  Corvinus,  have 
been  addi-essed  as  uictor  qua  terrae,  quaque  patent  maria  ? 


6 


BIRT'S  EDITION   OF 


I  say  nothing  of  the  creeping  style  of  ix,  quite  at  vari- 
ance with  all  we  know  of  Ovid,  and  particularly  with 
what  the  elder  Seneca  singles  out  as  his  special  character- 
istic, his  exuberance. 

My  present  purpose,  however,  is  a  defined  one ;  I  aim  to 
show  in  a  marked  instance  the  progress  of  criticism  in  Latin 
poetry  from  the  point  of  view  not  of  grammar,  nor  except 
incidentally  of  metric,  but  of  Palaeography.  The  founda- 
tions of  this  inquiry  are  due  to  Sillig,  whose  researches 
into  the  MSS.  of  the  Appendix  Vergiliana  covered  a  wide 
ground,  and  may  still  be  read  with  profit  in  the  last  volume 
of  Wagner's  reprint  of  Heyne's  Vergil. 

Sillig  was  succeeded  by  Ribbeck  and  H.  A.  J.  Munro, 
who  collated  the  Cambridge  MS.  of  Gulex  for  Ribbeck's 
edition,  and  of  Aetna  (in  the  same  codex)  for  his  own  edition 
of  the  latter  poem.  After  these  came  Bahrens,  an  inde- 
fatigable collator  of  MSS.,  but  so  wild  in  his  conjectural 
restorations  of  corrupt  passages  as  greatly  to  impair  the 
effect  of  his  otherwise  valuable  labours.  Bahrens'  edition, 
which  includes  Aetna,  forms  the  second  volume  of  his 
Poetae  Latini  Minores.  My  own  edition,  projected  as  far 
back  as  1876,  did  not  appear  till  1907.  The  edition  of 
Curcio  is  dated  1908,  and  is  still  unfinished:  that  of 
Vollmer  forms  the  second  volume  of  his  new  issue  of 
Bahrens. 

This  rapid  summary  of  the  men  who  have  placed  succes- 
sively the  MS.  question  in  a  clear  light  gives  a  peculiar 
interest  to  Professor  Birt's  Catalepton.  It  may  be  said, 
indeed,  that  this  is  a  small  part  and  by  no  means  the  most 
interesting  of  the  Opuscula  Vergiliana,  yet,  small  as  it  is,  it 
contains  what  for  most  lovers  of  Vergil  is  the  first  of  all 
requisites,  the  poems  which  bear  upon  the  life  of  the  great 
poet  himself.  Birt,  as  Vollmer  somewhat  earlier,  accepts  this 
small  series  of  miniature  poems  (ra  Karh  Actttoi/),  including 
three  sets  of  verses  in  honour  of  the  god  Priapus  with  other 
slight  epigrammata,  as  genuine  works  of  Vergil's  youth, 
put  together,  after  the  poet's  demise,  by  the  two  editors  of 
the  Aeneid,  Varius   and   Tucca,  perhaps   mainly  by   the 


THE  VERGILIAN   CATALEPTON  7 

former  of  the  two,  Varius.  To  both,  or  to  Varius  alone,  the 
last  poem  of  the  series — 

Vate  Syracosio  qui  dulcior,  Hesiodoque 
Maior,  Homereo  non  minor  ore  fuit, 

Illius  haec  quoque  sunt  diuini  elementa  poetae 
Et  leuis  in  uario  carmine  Calliope, 

may  fairly  be  attributed.  It  forms  a  fitting  epilogue  to  the 
collection,  and  states  unmistakably  that  the  Catalepta  which 
precede  it  are  the  juvenile  effusions  of  the  poet  who  outdid 
Theocritus  in  his  Eclogues,  Hesiod  in  his  Georgics,  Homer 
in  his  Aeneid.  No  such  categoric  statement  exists  in  the 
case  of  the  other  opuscula  attributed  to  Vergil,  and  Birt  is 
certainly  right  in  emphasizing  this  fact,  and  noting  it  as  an 
argument  for  the  genuineness  of  the  whole  Catalepton, 

Yet  such  an  admission,  coming  as  it  does  from  the  home 
of  sceptical  criticism,  Germany,  must  be  considered  almost 
phenomenal,  especially  if  contrasted  with  Skutsch's  daring 
theories  in  a  quite  opposite  direction. 

Birt  himself  makes  one  exception  to  his  acceptance  of  all 
the  Catalepta  as  Vergil's.  It  is  the  one  I  have  translated  for 
this  lecture,  ix.  He  considers  both  the  metre  and  the  diction 
of  ix  alien  to  the  style  of  Vergil,  in  particular  the  numerous 
trisyllabic  and  quadrisyllable  endings  of  the  pentameters, 
the  frequent  elisions  in  the  latter  half  of  the  pentameters 
fulmine  et  irribre  loueniy  fiumina  adire  Tagi,  carmine 
adire  sales,  the  spondaizon  namque,  fatehor  enini,  quae 
maxima  deterrendiy  and  the  inordinate  fondness  for  repe- 
titions of  the  same  word. 

To  these  arguments,  I  think,  no  very  great  weight  can 
be  attached.  The  poem  is,  if  by  Vergil,  the  work  of  Vergil  in 
his  youth,  when  his  style  was  still  unformed,  and  while  he 
was  still  getting  his  hand  in.  How  it  should  have  found  a 
place  in  the  other  elementa  or  youthful  productions  of  Vergil 
is  a  still  unsolved  problem.  But  the  fact  of  the  Ciris  being 
also  addressed  to  a  Messalla  may  suggest  an  explanation.  It 
does  not  greatly  matter  whether  the  Messalla  who  is  there 
called  iuuenum  doctissime  is  the  orator  Corvinus  himself 


.; 


lit 


8 


Bmrs  EDITION   OF 


or  a  son  or  possibly  some  other  member  of  the  family.  If 
the  Clris  was  popularly  ascribed  to  Vergil  at  the  time  when 
Varius  and  Tueca  put  together  and  edited  the  Catalepton, 
that  would  be  a  reason  for  including  in  the  list  of  short 
pieces  which  made  up  the  Gatcdepton  another  poem  of  which 
a  Messalla  was  the  hero. 

As  a  preliminary  to  such  remarks  or  criticisms  as  Birt's 
edition  and  commentary  suggest,  I  have  thought  it  worth 
while  to  append  a  prose  translation,  in  which  the  views  of 
the  new  editor  are  studiously  followed,  except  in  one  or 
two  cases  where  I  could  not  agree. 


Translation  of  Catalept.  IX. 

Pauca  mihi,  niueo  sed  non  incognita  Phoebo. 

Some  few  words  of  song,  but  those  not  unrecognized  by 
glistening  Phoebus,  a  few  words  dictate,  ye  learned  Muses, 
nnto  me.  A  conqueror  is  come,  the  splendid  glory  as  ye  may 
see  of  a  triumph  as  splendid,  a  conqueror  through  the  length 
and  breadth  of  land  and  seas.  And  with  him  he  bears 
rough  tokens  of  a  barbaric  conflict,  comparable  with 
heroic  Diomede  or  haughty  Eryx,  yet  none  the  less  for 
that  supreme  in  calling  to  light  your  songs,  and  deserving 
himself  to  set  foot  in  the  poet's  holy  companies.  This  then 
is  the  reason,  O  best  of  men,  why  I  fret  beyond  my  wont 
with  strange  anxieties,  pondering  where  to  find  something 
I  may  write  to  you,  something  I  may  write  about  you. 
For,  let  me  not  deny  it,  that  which  should  have  been 
the  chiefest  reason  to  frighten  me  from  the  task,  has 
proved  the  chief  incitement  to  urge  me  on. 

12-22. 

Some  few  lines  of  yours,  Messalla,  have  found  their 
way  into  my  pages,  lines  that  have  the  wit,  no  less 
than  the  language  of  Cecropia,  lines  that  deserve  to 
be  greeted  by  centuries  still  in  the  future  and  to  outlive 
the  old  sages  of  Phrygia  and  Pylos.  In  these  the  shepherds 
Moeris  and  Meliboeus  took  their  ease  beneath  the  leafy 
covert  of  a  spreading  oak,  interchanging  melodious  verses 


THE  VERGILIAN   CATALEPTON 


9 


vv 


in  alternating  response,  like  those  which  the  youthful  poet  of 
Sicily  loves.  Gods  all  and  goddesses  contended  with  each 
other  to  deck  the  hero-woman,  each  with  their  several 
adornment. 

23-38. 
O  happiest  of  all  maidens  she  that  had  thee  to  sing 
her  praise.  No  other  shall  ever  boast  to  surpass  her 
in  glory — not  she  who,  if  only  she  had  not  been  se- 
duced by  the  Hesperides'  gift,  had  surely  outrun  fleet 
Hippomenes  ;  not  she  that  was  bom  from  a  swan's  ^gg, 
Helen  the  Fair;  not  Cassiepia  glittering  in  the  highest 
heaven  ;  not  the  woman  (mulier  for  multum)  that  kept  her 
suitors  long  at  bay  by  a  chariot  race,  she  whom  each  gift- 
laden  hand  was  fain  to  secure  as  a  bride,  in  whose  behalf 
her  wicked  father  many  a  time  drained  his  son-in-law's 
life-blood,  and  many  a  time  the  grass  streamed  with  gore 
that  dyed  it  to  a  sanguine  hue  —  no,  not  queenly  Semele, 
nor  Argive  Acrisione,  looking  that  Jove  should  descend  upon 
her  in  a  storm  of  lightning  or  in  rain,  nor  yet  she  for 
ravishing  whom  the  Tarquins,  son  and  sire,  left  the  house- 
hold gods  of  their  fathers  for  exile,  in  the  day  when  Rome 
first  changed  the  domination  of  tyrants  for  the  consuls* 
milder  rule. 

39-54. 

Many  and  well- deserved  as  many  are  the  splendid  rewards 
that  Rome  has  given  to  her  foster-sons  the  Messallae,  the 
champions  of  the  people. 

Why  indeed  should  I  recount  those  tasks  of  extraordinary 
effort  ?  Those  rough  seasons  of  severe  campaigning  ?  How 
he  disdained  the  Forum,  the  Rostra,  the  City  of  Rome  it- 
self, and  chose  rather  to  live  in  a  camp,  so  far  removed  from 
his  son  here  and  from  this  his  native  land.  How  he  endured 
seasons  now  of  immoderate  cold,  now  of  excessive  heat,  or 
again  could  make  his  bed  on  the  hard  flint-stone.  How  in 
face  of  foul  weather  he  would  often  navigate  the  raging 
Euxine,  often  force  the  sea,  often  the  storm  to  yield  to  his 
enterprise  :  often,  again,  flung  his  body  upon  a  dense  mass 


10 


BIRT'S  EDITION  OF 


of  foemen  with  no  thought  of  war's  hazard  that  threatens 
all  alike.  How  by  turns  he  marched  upon  the  nimble-bodied 
Africans,  those  swarming  multitudes  of  a  perjured  race, 
now  to  rushing  Tagus*  golden  streams  ;  how  in  pursuit  of 
battle  he  sought  out  one  people  after  another,  and  cart-ied  his 
victories  beyond  the  bourne  of  oceans. 

55-64. 

Not  for  me,  not,  I  say,  for  me  is  it  to  deal  with  achieve- 
ments such  as  these.  Nay,  I  would  even  venture  to  declare, 
it  18  scarcely  for  mortal  man  to  do  so. 

By  themselves  alone  shall  these  great  acts  convey  their 
historic  record  through  the  world,  shall  themselves  beget 
an  unsurpassable  glory.  My  part  it  shall  be,  to  blazon 
those  poems  which  the  high  gods  Apollo  with  his  Muse 
Bacchus  with  his  Aglaia,  have  combined  with  yourself  to 
frame. 

If,  lowly  as  I  am,  I  yet  am  competent  to  commend  your 
verse,  if  I  may  approximate  the  poetry  of  Cyrene,  approach 
the  wit  of  Greece  with  a  song  of  Rome,  thenceforward  my 
success  IS  even  beyond  all  to  which  I  aspire.  This  contents 
me ;  with  the  stolid  rabble  I  have  nothing  to  da 

Remarks  and  Criticisms. 

In  vv.  5,  7  we  have  clear  imitation  of  Catullus  Ixvi.  7 
'  Dulcia  nocturnae  portans  uestigia  rixae'.  Insignia,  ■  tokens ' 
might  be  scars  which  the  chances  of  a  war  with  barbaric 
tribes  had  left  on  the  body  of  Messalla.  This  seems 
pointed  to  by  Horrida,  in  obvious  antithesis  to  Catullus' 
Dvlcia. 

15,  16. 

Carmina,  quae  Phrygium,  saeclis  accepta  futuris, 
Carmina,  quae  Pylium  uincere  digna  senem. 

So  both  Birt  and  Vollmer,  and  so  my  own  edition  1907 
But  there  is  some  doubt  as  to  the  reading.  B  omits 
verse  15  m.  pr.  and  only  adds  it  in  the  margin,  with  prciu 
for  pihum  or  pylium  of  Ar.  and  M.    In  the  same  verse  for 


THE  VERGILIAN  CATALEPTON 


11 


i 


•1 


'•^ 


quae  B  has  qd  over  an  erasure,  not  quae  {que),  as  Ar.: 
Rehdiger  60  has  sed.  If  prciu  of  B^  is  to  be  trusted  this 
would  seem  to  be  Phrygium  ;  yet  the  8ed  of  Rehd.  agrees 
very  well  with  Pylium, '  verses  which  shall  find  favour  with 
ages  to  come  and  prove  worthy  to  outlive  Nestor,  but  Nestor 
old,  i.  e.  at  the  very  end  of  his  life  of  three  generations/ 

21,  22. 

Certatim  omabant  omnes  heroida  diui, 
Certatim  diuae  munere  quoque  suo. 

It  is  odd  that  in  21  MSS.  agree  to  give  diue\  even  B  has 
diue,  i.  e.  with  a  point  after  the  word. 

Is  it  possible  that  the  goddesses  alone  were  introduced 
by  Messalla  as  vying  with  each  other  which  should  bestow 
the  most  sumptuous  present  on  the  heroina  ?  The  whole 
poem  illustrates  the  writer's  abuse  of  repetitions,  and 
omnes  of  the  hexameter  might  reappear  in  the  pentameter 
in  the  form  of  an  iterated  Cei^tatim  diuae.  *A11  the 
goddesses  were  eager  to  adorn  the  hero-woman,  I  say  were 
eager  to  adorn  her  with  each  her  several  gift/  quoque  of 
B,  since  Madvig's  disquisition,  will  of  course  be  unanimously 
accepted  instead  of  quaeque,  which  most  MSS.  except  B 
offer. 

23,  24. 

Felicem  ante  alias  o  te  scriptore  puellam  ! 
Altera  non  fama  dixerit  esse  prior. 

A  lucid  example  of  the  superiority  of  B  to  the  other  MSS. 
In  23  the  Munich  MS.  (M)  for  o  te  has  tot,  Ar.  tanto.  No 
one  seems  to  have  conjectured  o  te,  but  it  is  undeniably 
right,  and  one  of  the  chief  gains  we  owe  to  B. 

In  24  B's  esse  is  as  undeniably  right  against  ipse  of  the 
later  MSS.,  and  was  seen  to  be  so  by  Muncker,  the  editor  of 
Hyginus,  in  his  note  on  Fab.  185.  Yet  B  agrees  with  all 
MSS.  in  giving  not  Altera,  but  Alter,  which  must  be  wrong 
— a  proof  that  even  this  early  and  excellent  codex  cannot 
always  be  trusted.     Altera  is  Scaliger's  emendation. 


12 


BIRT'S  EDITION   OF 


29-32. 

Non  defensa  diu  fniultum  certamine  equorum 

Optabant  grauidae  quam  sibi  quaeque  manus, 
Saepe  animam  generi  pro  qua  pater  impius  hausit, 

Saepe  rubro  similis  sanguine  fluxit  humus. 

These  four  verses  are  full  of  difficulty.  Mvltum  is 
explained  by  Birt  as  =  multoimm ;  he  compares  magnani- 
mum  Aen.  iii.  704,  Georg.  iv.  476,  parmtm  Stat.  Theb.  i.  206, 
innumerum  (equorum)  Val.  Fl.  ii.  130.  This  seems  doubt- 
ful: at  any  rate  Neue-Wagener  quote  no  instance  of  muliuTn 
as  a  gen.  plur.  in  the  Index  of  their  Formenlehre.  Sabba- 
dini's  conjecture  diu  et  multum,  N^methy's  multo,  are 
neither  of  them  convincing.  The  poet  would  have  avoided, 
I  think,  in  so  short  a  composition  an  elision  as  harsh  as 
diu  ety  against  which  a  double  objection  may  be  urged : 
(1)  the  place  of  the  elided  syllable,  (2)  the  fact  that  u  of 
all  vowels  least  admits  of  ehsion.  Perhaps  multum  is 
a  merely  palaeographical  error  for  mulier^  mir  might  be 
mistaken  for  mlt,  if  either  the  -um  was  not  expressed,  or  the 
letters  or  abbreviations  conveying  it  had  become  obscure 
by  age  or  other  causes. 

In  30  Birt  follows  B  implicitly  except  that  he  prints 
quam  for  quod  of  B. 

Optabant  grauidae  quam  sibi  quaeque  manus, 

interpreting  grauidae  manu8  of  the  load  of  presents  which 
the  suitors  of  Oenomaus'  daughter  brought  in  hopes  of 
obtaining  her  in  marriage.  I  could  have  wished  that  this 
view  had  been  defended  more  at  length ;  so  far  as  I  know, 
Hippodamia  in  the  ordinary  accounts,  is  wooed  by  her 
suitors  racing  against  her  father  Oenomaus,  until  Pelops 
wins  the  race  against  him  by  a  stratagem.  Biicheler,  who 
also  retained  grauidae,  explained  the  word  quite  differently 
of  the  heavy  and  unskilful  driving  of  the  long  series  of 
defeated  suitors.^  I  confess  to  a  doubt  as  to  either 
explanation  of  grauidae  Tiianua,  and  would  put  in  a  claim 

>  Stultum  certamen  equorum  Optabant  grauidae  quid  sibi  quaeque 
manus  ?    (Biicheler). 


THE  VERGILIAN   CATALEPTON 


la 


not  only  for  the  Aldine  correction  Oraiae,  but  for  ToUius* 
ingenious  nurum  in  place  of  manus. 

The  verse,  if  I  mistake  not,  is  a  slightly  varied  form  of 
what  is  said  in  the  Ciris  (412)  of  Scylla : 

Certatim  ex  omni  petiit  quam  Graecia  regno. 

In  both  passages  some  mention  of  Greece ,  as  the  land 
whence  Hippodamia's  suitors  came,  is  required  to  give  the 
proper  clearness  and  effect.  Grauidus  and  grauis  (graius) 
appear  to  be  interchanged  in  Stat.  Silv.  v.  3.  127 :  nurus 
and  manus  are  similarly  confused  in  the  Dijon  MS.  of 
Ibis  178  *  turba  cruenta  manus  nurus.' 

•     •   • 

On  this  view,  and  supposing  the  poet  to  have  written 
Optabant  Graiae  quam  sibi  quaeque  nurum  ^, 

we  have  a  description  of  Hippodamia  as  the  bride  whom 
every  Greek  mother  desired  to  see  wedded  to  her  son. 
The  passage  ends  with  a  verse  which  is  not  yet  settled  : 

Saepe  rubro  similis  sanguine  fluxit  humus. 

Here  similis  of  MSS.  was  early  altered  to  Eleis,  which  all 
the  recent  editors  have  rightly  rejected.  I  do  not  feel 
sure  that  similis  is  not  right,  *The  ground  often  flowed 
with  red  gore,  transformed  into  its  hue.'       Cf.  Dryden's 

*  And  the  green  grass  was  dyed  to  sanguine  hue.'  But  if 
any   change   is   required,   my  conjecture   rubrae   similis, 

*  as  if  it  were  red,'  is  the  etisiest  that  can  be  offered. 

34.  Birt's  reading 

Inmitti  exspectans  fulmine  et  imbre  louem 

for  Inmiti  exspectat  of  B  is  probable  enough,  but  not 
certain.  Inmitti,  indeed,  is  a  great  improvement  upon 
Inmiti^  but  exspectans  for  exspectat  or  exspectant  would 
be  a  rare  and  rather  solecistic  case  of  a  singular  word  as 
a  plural,  where  the  sense  particularly  calls  for  a  plural. 

*  Non  Semele,  non  Danae,  exspectantes  inmitti  louem  (ilia) 
f ulmina,  (haec)  imbre.'    Yet  the  distribution  of  the  ablatives 

*  Tollius  quoted  Aen.  xi.  581  *Multae  illam  frustra  Tyrrhena  per  oppida 
matres  Optavere  nurum  %  which  agrees  remarkably  with  '  Optabant  Graiae 
quam  sibi  quaeque  nurum  \ 


14 


BIRT'S  EDITION  OF 


fulmine,  imhre^  the  former  referring  to  Semele  alone,  the 
latter  to  Danae  alone,  is  perhaps  a  sufficient  excuse  for  the 
singular  eocspectams.  Whereas  any  such  change  of  con- 
struction as  eoospectant  or  exspectat  for  the  participle  which 
prevails  in  the  other  clauses,  *  Non  edita  Tyndaris — Non 
fulgens  Cassiepia — Non  defensa,*  is  very  unpleasing  and 
forms  a  harsh  break  in  the  regular  sequence. 
43-44. 

Castra  foro  rostris,  urbi  praeponere  castra, 
Tam  procul  hoc  gnato,  tarn  procul  hac  patria  ? 

rostris  is  one  of  Birt's  happiest  corrections.  B  gives 
the  V.  thus : 

Castra  foro  castra  urbi  praeponere  castra. 

In  44  the  case  is  less  clear.     B  gives  it  thus : 

lam  procul  hoc  gnato,  tam  procul  hac  patria, 

and  both  Birt  and  VoUmer  agree  in  retaining  hoc  gnato,  hac 
patria.  It  may  perhaps  be  urged  in  favour  of  my  haec  .  . . 
hxiec  that  it  accords  with  the  fondness  for  repetition  of  the 
same  word  which  marks  the  poem  throughout. 

51.  Nunc  celeris  Afros  fperiurae  milia  gentis. 

It  is  much  to  be  regretted  that  B  here  gives  an  un- 
certain sound.  When  I  examined  the  passage  in  Brussels 
I  recorded  pniri^  as  the  reading  of  B ;  the  Arundelianus 
(Ar.)  has  periuria.  The  right  word  would  seem  to 
be  either  periurae  or  as  I  rather  incline  to  believe 
periuria.  An  adjective  perinrius  seems  to  have  existed 
if  we  may  trust  the  MSS.  of  Statins'  Silvae  iii.  3. 
179  haud  aliter  gemuit  periuria  Theseus  Litora,  *  the 
perjured  shore,'  where  he  had  promised  Aegeus  what  he 
did  not  fulfil ;  so  here  the  Africans  are  called  a  perjured 
swarm,  in  allusion  to  their  insincere  and  untrustworthy 
character.  Any  one  who  has  studied  the  Brussels  MS. 
of  Gatalepton  will  feel  with  me  that  B's  original  pernirif 
points  to  an  adj.  in  -ius  rather  than  -us.  Is  it  not  possible 
that  Ar.  has  here  preserved  the  true  reading  and  the 
right  word?  As  regards  formation  we  have  an  exact 
parallel  in  the  adj.  iniurius. 


THE  VERGILIAN   GATALEPTON 


15 


It  is  in  the  finale  of  the  poem  that  I  differ  most  from 
Prof.  Birt,  though  in  the  translation  I  have  not  deviated  from 
expressing  his  views  as  clearly  as  I  could. 

This  finale  is  in  eight  verses  (57-64) : — 

Ipsa  haec,  ipsa  ferent  rerum  monumenta  per  orbem, 

Ipsa  sibi  egregium  facta  decus  parient. 
Nos  ea  quae  tecum  finxerunt  carmina  diui 

Cynthius  et  Musa,  Bacchus  et  Aglaie, 
Si  laudem  aspirare  humilis,  si  adire  Cyrenas, 

Si  patrio  Graios  carmine  adire  sales, 
Possumus,  optatis  plus  iam  procedimus  ipsis. 

Hoc  satis  est,  pingui  nil  mihi  cum  populo. 

I  propose  to  translate  thus :  '  Of  their  own  unaided 
greatness,  their  own  simple  selves,  these  acts  shall  be  borne 
by  history  through  the  world,  of  themselves  shall  beget  their 
own  exceeding  glory.  As  for  me,— to  come  to  the  poems 
which  the  gods  have  helped  you,  Messalla,  to  frame,  if  I 
am  permitted  to  waft  upon  them  some  slight  degree  of 
praise,  if  I  may  approach  Gyrene's  unexalted  style,  approach 
Greek  wit  with  a  Latin  song,  my  success  is  already  beyond 
my  very  desires.  I  am  content ;  with  the  stolid  rabble 
I  have  nothing  to  do.' 

57,  58.  A  question.  Is  ipsa  haec  in  57  nominative  or 
accusative  ?  Birt  makes  it  nom.,  *  ipsa  haec,  ipsa  facta 
rerum  monumenta  ferent  per  orbem  et  sibi  egregium 
decus  parient '. 

If  this  is  so,  the  greatness  of  Messalla's  achievements 
would  be  sufficient  without  any  blazoning  on  the  part  of 
poets  or  panegyrists  to  make  a  historic  name  in  the 
world.  It  is  not  to  be  denied  that  there  is  a  neatness  in 
thus  making  the  ipsa  of  57  con-espond  as  a  nom.  with  ipsa 
in  58. 

Still  it  is  not  easy  to  get  over  the  strange  inversion  thus 
necessitated ;  for  it  is  the  recording  page  of  the  historian 
or  the  poet  which  carries  such  achievements  through  the 
world,  not  the  magnificence  of  the  achievements  which 
conveys  its  own  history.     I  incline  therefore  to  take  ipsa 


16 


BIRTS  EDITION  OF 


in  57  as  accusative,  rerum  monumenta  as  nominative. 
The  words  are  somewhat  indeterminate,  and  may  include 
inscriptions  set  up  in  commemoration  of  Messalla's  victories. 

The  next  distich,  59-60,  is  supposed  by  Birt  to  continue 
and  complete  the  section  beginning  Non  nostrum  est  taiitas, 
nouy  inquarriy  attingere  laudes,  and  so  I  have  translated  it 
in  the  prose  version.  On  this  view  ea  quae  depends  on 
feremus  per  orbem  supplied  from  57.  This  theory,  while 
avoiding  some  difficulty  of  construction,  places  the  poet  in 
the  inconsistent  position  of  disclaiming  any  special  power 
of  his  own  in  making  his  friend  famous,  and  then  professing 
his  intention  of  commending  that  friend's  Greek  poems  to 
the  admiration  of  the  world.  With  N^methy  and  Vollmer  I 
prefer  to  follow  the  large  majority  of  editors  in  beginning 
a  new  sentence  with  Nos  ea  quae. 

If  the  MS.  reading  in  61  ^l  laudem  aspirare  is  genuine, 
as  Birt's  examples  make  probable,  6T  quae  tecum  finxerunt 
carmiTia  diui  must  be  a  construction  Kara  avyea-iVy  ea  an 
accusative  attracted  into  the  case  of  carmlna  like  urbem 
quam  statuo  uestra  est  If,  however,  my  emendation  laude 
may  be  accepted,  ea  may  be  accusative  depending  on 
aspirare,  '  if  I  may  breathe  on  your  poems  with  praise,*  a 
variation  on  laudevi  aspirare  eis. 

In  60  both  B  and  M  give  Musa,  not  Musae,  Birt  has  the 
courage  to  retain  Musa,  but  on  grounds  which  seem  to  me 
very  hazardous. 

(1)  Apollo  is  generally  attended  by  the  Muses,  not  by  one 
Muse.  (2)  The  weak  sound  of  the  short  d  at  the  end  of  the 
first  half  of  the  pentameter  is  so  very  marked  as  to  fall 
unpleasantly  on  the  ear.  An  inequality  is  thus  produced 
in  the  two  halves  of  the  verse  which  is  unexampled  in  any 
of  the  other  pentameters  in  the  poem  and  has  no  justifica- 
tion here.  (3)  The  conclusion  we  are  landed  in,  if  either  B 
of  cent,  xii  or  (in  Ovid,  Am.  iii.  7.  55)  P  and  S  (Futeaneus 
and  Sangallensis  of  cent,  x  and  xi)  are  to  be  thought  in 
passages  prima  facie  corrupt  to  have  a  weight  equal,  say 
to  the  primary  MSS.  of  Vergil  which  go  back  to  the  early 


THE   VERGILIAN  CATALEPTON 


17 


centuries  of  the  Christian  era,  is  unsound  and  not  justifiable. 
To  put  the  long  a  of  grauia  in  Aen.  iii.  464  Dona  dehinc  auro 
grauia  sectoque  elephanto,  from  which  there  is  no  MS.  de- 
viation and  where  all  the  primary  MSS.  as  well  as  Servius 
in  his  Commentary  agree,  is  on  a  level  with  Musa  in 
Catalept.  60,  critically  a  proceeding  against  which  many 
will  exclaim.  The  utmost  we  can  safely  say  is  that  in 
a  verse  like  Am.  iii.  7.  55  At  puto  non  hlanda,  non 
optima  perdidit  in  me  Oscvla  there  is  a  possibility  that  the 
neuter  plural  a  of  blanda  was  in  this  passage  exceptionally 
allowed  to  be  scanned  as  long,  reserving  to  ourselves  the 
right  to  doubt  whether  something  quite  different,  e.g.  At 
puto  non  blanda  est,  or  At  puto  non  blande  (Ehwald),  may 
not  have  existed  in  much  older  MSS.  of  the  Amores,  now 
unfortunately  lost.  If  the  Bruxellensis  of  the  Catalepton 
is  removed  by  two  or  three  centuries  from  the  Arundelianus 
and  other  fifteenth  century  MSS.,  its  own  distance  from  any 
one  of  the  earliest  MSS.  of  Vergil  is  incomparably  greater. 
Incomparably,  because  its  distance  is  not  purely  one  of 
time,  but  of  culture  and  civilization.  The  darkness  of  the 
early  middle  age  has  supplanted  the  civilization  of  the 
Roman  Empire. 

One  suggestion  I  have  yet  to  ofier.  In  61  humilis  is 
explained  by  Birt  as  referring  to  the  poet,  whose  humility 
contents  itself  with  a  modest  wish  to  commend  his  friend 
to  the  notice  of  the  world  in  verses  which  may  bear  com- 
parison with  Cyrene.  This  makes  an  awkward  break  in 
the  rhythm ;  may  not  humilis  refer  to  Gyrenas,  in  allusion 
to  the  avoidance  by  Callimachus  and  Eratosthenes  (both 
Cyrenaeans)  of  anything  magniloquent  or  bombastic  in 
their  poetry?  Propertius  speaks  of  Twn  infiati  somnia 
Callimachi.  The  translator  of  Messalla's  verses  might  fitly 
describe  himself  similarly. 


il 


oxford:    HORACE  HART 
PRINTER  TO   THE  UNIVERSITY 


'Hm 


m 


